D20-D21-D22 - Hull Structure Monitoring System and VDR - 07-12-09 V6

D20-D21-D22 Hull Structure Monitoring System and VDR
Project no.
038374
Project acronym
EMDM
PROJECT TITLE
European Maritime Data Management
Sixth Framework Programme

Thematic Priority 6: Sustainable Development, Global Change and Ecosystems
Funding Scheme: Specific Targeted Research or Innovation Project
Start date of project: 1 March 2007
Duration: 24 Months
D20-D21-D22 Hull Structure Monitoring System

and VDR
DUE DATE OF DELIVERABLE: 31ST AUGUST 2008

Actual submission date: 7th December 2009
Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable: University of

Southampton
Electronic Written By Checked by (WPL) Approved by

Document Reference (Project
Coordinator))
EMDM D20-D21-D22 J.-M. Forestier M. Taylor

(Hull Structure S. Austin
Monitoring System and
VDR) Final 07_12_09 V8
Dissemination Level
PU Public
PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services)
RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission
Services)
CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission
Services)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................. 1
2 NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................................... 1
2.1 Acronyms used............................................................................................... 1
2.2 Vocabulary conventions ................................................................................ 2
3 PRESENT DAY HSMSS .................................................................................. 3
3.1 Goals of HSMSs ............................................................................................. 3
3.2 HSMSs carriage requirements ..................................................................... 4
3.3 HSMSs certification ...................................................................................... 4
3.4 HSMSs Classification Societies rules ......................................................... 5
3.4.1 The minimal HSMS ..................................................................................... 6
3.4.2 American Bureau of Shipping ..................................................................... 8
3.4.3 Bureau Veritas ........................................................................................... 11
3.4.4 Det Norsk Veritas ...................................................................................... 12
3.4.5 Korean Register of Shipping ..................................................................... 15
3.4.6 Lloyds Register of Shipping..................................................................... 16
3.4.7 Nippon Kaiji Kyokai ................................................................................. 18
3.4.8 Comments about these specifications ........................................................ 20
3.5 HSMSs manufacturers .............................................................................. 20
3.6 Survey of existing HSMSs........................................................................... 21
3.6.1 Presentation ............................................................................................... 21
3.6.2 Answers to the questionnaire ..................................................................... 21
3.6.3 Comments .................................................................................................. 25
4 FITNESS OF HSMS FOR ACCIDENT ANALYSIS .................................. 26
4.1 Is the minimal HSMS fit for accident analysis? ....................................... 26
4.1.1 Processed data / raw data ........................................................................... 26
4.1.2 LBSGs ....................................................................................................... 26
4.1.3 Bow accelerometer .................................................................................... 27
4.1.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 27
4.2 HSMS in case of structural damage .......................................................... 27
4.2.1 Types of structural failures ........................................................................ 27
4.2.2 Computation of the deformations in case of structural damage ................ 28
4.3 Structural Health Monitoring .................................................................... 30
4.3.1 Damage-occurrence detection ................................................................... 32
4.3.2 Detection of slamming............................................................................... 36
4.3.3 Modal analysis of the Liverpool Bay ......................................................... 37
4.3.4 Structural deformation measurements ....................................................... 42
4.3.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 44
5 EVOLUTION OF HSMSS AND VDRS ....................................................... 45
5.1 Evolution of HSMSs .................................................................................... 45
5.1.1 Filtering the sensor data ............................................................................. 45
5.1.2 Sending modal parameters......................................................................... 46
5.1.3 Measuring the temperature ........................................................................ 46
5.1.4 Preparing screen data ................................................................................. 46
5.1.5 Providing playback codes for of the recorded data ................................... 46
5.2 Evolution of VDRs....................................................................................... 46

5.2.1 Recording the filtered data ........................................................................ 46
5.2.2 Recording the modal parameters ............................................................... 47
5.2.3 Recording the temperature......................................................................... 47
5.2.4 Recording the screens ................................................................................ 47
5.3 Physical / logical interface between HSMS and VDR .............................. 47
6 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 47
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Minimal HSMS set of sensors (with the authorization of BMT SeaTech
Ltd.) ................................................................................................................................ 6
Figures 2: HULLMOS LBSG sensor (with the authorization of R. Rouvari Oy) ....... 7
Figure 3: Vertical displacement of the first seven deformation modes ....................... 38
Figure 4: Vertical displacement of mode 2 in the undamaged and damaged cases ..... 38
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 1: Manufacturers of HSMSs (January 2009) ..................................................... 20

Table 2: Main particulars of the container ship Liverpool Bay ................................... 28
Table 3: Locations of the damage ................................................................................ 29
Table 4: Bending moments in undamaged and damaged conditions ........................... 30
Table 5: Dry modal frequencies in the undamaged and damaged cases...................... 41
1 Introduction
Today, for safety purposes, some ship structures are monitored with a Hull Structure Monitoring
Systems (HSMS) and its outputs are recorded in the VDR. The primary function of VDRs is
support of accident investigation; its secondary function is a posteriori operational analysis. The
analysis of the present situation of VDR reported in the EMDM D6 report (Draft amendments to
existing VDR standards) shows that, due to limitations to incident investigations and to changes
in technology and standards, the VDR standards should evolve. The aim of the present study is
to investigate the direction in which the VDR standards should evolve to record structural
damage, i.e. when linked to a HSMS.
In the present report, the adaptation of current HSMSs to the VDR functions is investigated. As a
VDR acts only as a recorder, the main evolution that will allow the VDR to perform its function
for structural damage lies in the HSMS. This investigation results in proposals for the evolution
of HSMS standards and in amendments to VDR standards. The latter are incorporated in D6.
2 Nomenclature
2.1 ACRONYMS USED

ABS American Bureau of Shipping
AHRS Attitude and heading reference system. Cf. D7 (Draft low cost VDR standards)
Sec. 7: Annex: Ship Motion Measurement System, for a description of them.
BV Bureau Veritas
CS Classification Society
DNV Det Norsk Veritas
dwt Deadweight tonnage (this is a mass: 1 dwt = 1 tonne1)
E Youngs modulus (tensile modulus of elasticity)
ELB Electronic log-book
FBG Fibre Bragg grating
GNSS Global navigation satellite system (GPS, Glonass, Galileo)
HSMS Hull structure monitoring system
IBS Integrated bridge system
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IMO International Maritime Organization
KR Korean Register of Shipping
1
Metric ton.
1
L Ships length
LBSG Long based strain gauge
LNG Liquefied natural gas (carrier)
LR Lloyds Register of Shipping
MCA (U.K.) Maritime and Coastguard Agency
MGN Marine Guidance Note (of the MCA)
MSC Maritime Safety Committee (of the IMO)
NK Nippon Kaiji Kyokai
NMEA National Marine Electronic Association
PC (Intel-based) personal computer
PP Peak picking (a method of identification of the modal frequencies of a system)
RPM Round per minute (for a propeller)
RTK Real time kinematic (mode): a relative positioning of GNSS antennas based on
signal carrier phases comparison. Vertical accuracy: 2 cm, horizontal accuracy:
1 cm.
SBSG Short based strain gauge
SHM Structural health monitoring
SSI Stochastic Subspace Identification (a method of system identification)
t tonne1
UPS Uninterruptible power supply
VDR Voyage data recorder
2.2 VOCABULARY CONVENTIONS

For readability:
Accident analysis means incident or accident analysis.
Accident means (incident or) accident involving structural damage. This damage
may be the cause of the whole accident or a consequence of other events (collision,
grounding) involved in the accident.
Torsion means torsion along the longitudinal axis of the ship.
Remark: Only strains are measured, never stresses2. In this study, this latter word is used only in
the quotations and in the Sec. 4.2.1 Types of structural failuresTypes of structural failures, p. Mis en forme : Police :Italique
27, which deals with strength of materials. In the rest of the study, only the word strain is used.
2
An exception is the sensor Stressprobe, cf.
Dover W. D., Brennan F. P. and De Leeuw B., ACSM Stressprobe; A New Non Contacting Stress Measurement
Technique for the Offshore Industry, Proc. OMAE 2001, No 3082, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3-8 June 2001.
2
3 Present day HSMSs
3.1 GOALS OF HSMSS

The goal of an HSMS is the assessment of the loads applied on the ship structure. These are
assessed by strain, acceleration and optionally water pressure measurements. They can be
complemented by an assessment of the forces applied on the cargo by motion measurements.
The threats produced by these loads are balanced against optimization of performance. A
continuous assessment of these threats is required onboard to support the ships ability to
maintain its schedule. Their long term assessment informs the optimization of the ships
profitability.
These assessments result in actions at several time scales:
Sort term actions (executed onboard):
o adaptation of the static loading (in ports and when sailing),
o adaptation of speed and heading.
Mid term actions (executed onboard and/or ashore):
o current voyage planning of static loading, speed and heading.
Long term actions (executed ashore):
o assessment of structural fatigue,
for preventive maintenance or repair,
for adaptation of the ship operations to its present fatigue status: voyage
assignment, route planning.
o assessment of voyage performances,
o possibly, setting of structural requirements for future ships.
To facilitate these actions, a HSMS can be linked to other internal or external systems, which can
be
the loading computer,
onboard or external wave measurement,
propulsion data (propeller RPM, fuel consumption, speed),
onboard or ashore route planning.
This shows that the present day function of HSMSs is only to inform operations.
A good review of HSMSs is contained in 3. This study has a broader scope than the present one:
it considers the response of the structure to waves as a whole, and so includes ship motions and
ice-loading problems.
3
Slaughter S. B., Cheung M. C., Sucharski D. and Cowper B, State of the Art in Hull Response Monitoring
Systems, (US) Ship Structure Committee, Report SSC-401, August 1997.
3
3.2 HSMSS CARRIAGE REQUIREMENTS

After the numerous bulk carrier losses in the eighties, the International Maritime Organization
(IMO) adopted the resolution A.713(17) (1991): Safety of Ships Carrying Solid Bulk Cargoes
Annex: Interim measures to be taken to improve the Safety of Ships Carrying Solid Bulk
Cargoes. This resolution requests the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) to carry out its work
on bulk carrier safety (Point 1. of the resolution), but states that this work will only result in
recommendations (Point 7.). This resolution says further that owners should consider fitting
HSMSs voluntarily (Point 4.1 of the Annex to the resolution): the carriage of HSMS is not
mandatory; it is only recommended.
There are no other IMOs carriage requirements or recommendations for fitting HSMSs on other
type of vessels. So presently the fitting of the HSMSs on alltypes of ships is entirely at the
discretion of ships owners. The actual carriage of HSMSs is given in Sec. 3.6 Survey of Mis en forme : Accentuation
existing HSMSsSurvey of existing HSMSs, 6 Effective carriage of HSMSs, p. 25. Roughly
speaking, the displacement of the equipped vessels is above 100 000 t (because of similitude
laws4, big vessels are more prone to structural failures than small ones).
3.3 HSMSS CERTIFICATION

The IMOs resolution A713(17) was later expressed in more detail by the MSC/Circ.646 (June
1994): Recommendations For The Fitting of Hull Stress Monitoring Systems Annex:
Recommendations for the Fitting of Hull Stress Monitoring Systems for Improving the Safe
Operations of Ships Carrying Dry Cargo In Bulk. This circular specifies the sensors, the results
to be computed and the presence of a display and of data storage for the processed data:
The sensors specified are
.1.1 Long-based gauges for strain measurements, located on the main deck at
different positions along the ships length, to detect stresses during loading,
unloading navigation, e.g., the gauges for strain measurement should be
located on the main deck in way of each cargo hold and, if necessary, at the
location where the maximum hull girder wave bending stress can be
expected during navigation, loading and unloading.
.1.2 One accelerometer for measuring vertical accelerations at the bow.
.1.3 Two accelerometers for measuring roll and sway, suitably located at the
centre line of the ship.
The system should include
An electronic data storage recording device suitable for accumulating statistical
information for feedback purposes.
4
For two mechanical structures in geometrical similitude, made of the same material and with forces proportional to
weights, the smallest structure is the strongest.
4
The MSC/Circ.646 requires that the hardware and software of the HSMS be type approved by
the Administrations (of Members Governments). Following the usual procedure, this type
approval is obtained by the certification (see 5 for the definition of this word) by a recognized
Classification Society (CS) of the compliance of the HSMS with the MSC/Circ.646, see for
instance the Point 4 of the Marine Guidance Note (MGN) 108(M) of the U.K. Maritime and
Coastguard Agency (MCA) quoted below. But as the features specified in the MSC/Circ.646
have not been further defined by an international technical body such as the IEC, no
internationally accepted technical standard for HSMS exists per se. The administrations have
instead delegated this definition to CSs: the type approval certification is given by the
classification (see 5 for the precise definitions of the italicised words) of the HSMS against the
technical standards defined by the CSs, see for instance the Point 5 of the MCAs MGN 108(M)
quoted below.
4 The IMOs recommendations call for the hardware and software of the hull
stress monitoring system to be approved by the Administration. In this respect, the
MCA will accept type approval certification of compliance with MSC/Circ.646,
which has been issued by one of the Nominated Bodies, listed in Table A of the
annex to MSN No. M.1645 Type approval of Marine Equipment, who are
authorized to examine, test and certify equipment. The terms of M.1645 shall
apply. The type approval of hull stress monitoring systems will be included in the
next revision of M.1645.
5 Since the adoption of MSC/Circ.646 in 1994, the design of hull stress
monitoring systems has developed and some of the Nominated Bodies are
developing standards for such systems. Such development is beneficial and to be
encouraged. Consequently, the MCA will accept type approval certification which
has been issued by one of the Nominated Bodies in accordance with its published
standards or rules, provided that any deviation from MSC/Circ.646 is recorded
on the certificate and notified to the MCA.
The technical standards for HSMSs, i.e. the CSs rules, are reviewed in the next section.
3.4 HSMSS CLASSIFICATION SOCIETIES RULES

In this review, only the features in direct relationship with the VDR function: accident analysis
and a posteriori operational analysis, are considered. Other features, like linkage to a loading
computer, are not considered.
Comparison of features between CSs is made difficult by the differences of philosophy, of
specification style and of the vocabulary used. In this review, the vocabulary used by each CS is
preserved. This can be confusing.
5
Definitions (adapted from DNV):
Certification: a service confirming compliance of the equipment or vessel with applicable requirements (i.e.
industrial standards, international standards, statutory requirements) on the date that the survey is completed.
Classification: a service which comprises the development of independent technical standards for vessels (i.e. the
Classification Society rules) and to verify compliance with these rules throughout the vessels' life.
5
3.4.1 THE MINIMAL HSMS
3.4.1.1 MINIMAL SET OF SENSORS
The minimal HSMS set of sensors specified by almost all CSs is for;
Tankers, Bulk Carriers and General Cargo ships, cf. Figure 1 below:
four LBSGs:
two LBSGs at amidships, port and starboard, on the deck,
one LBSG at 0.25 L from the bow, on the deck,
one LBSG at 0.25 L from the stern, on the deck,
one vertical accelerometer located at the bow;
Af t Strain Gauge Midships Strain Fwd Strain Accelerometer

Gauges (P/S) Gauge
0.25L 0.25L
L
Figure 1: Minimal HSMS set of sensors (with the authorization of BMT SeaTech Ltd.)
Ships with large deck openings like container ships:

five LBSGs:
four LBSGs at amidships, port and starboard, on the deck and close to the bottom,
one LBSG at 0.25 L from the bow, on the deck,
one vertical accelerometer located at the bow.
A LBSG is composed of a rod fixed on the structure at one end and free to move at the other, cf.
Figures 2 (a) and (b) below. The measurement of the displacement of the free end of the rod
relatively to the structure gives the strain of the structure
1. in the direction of the rod,
2. averaged between its two ends.
The length6 of the strain gauge, i.e. the distance between the two ends, usually used for HSMSs
is around 2 m.
6
This length is sometimes called the basis of the strain gauge.
6
(a)
(b)

Figures 2: HULLMOS LBSG sensor (with the authorization of R. Rouvari Oy)
7
Other sensors can be added to this minimal set:

A bow seawater pressure gauge.
Horizontal accelerometers for roll and pitch measurement.
Horizontal angular rate gyros, also for roll and pitch measurement.
The horizontal accelerometers specified in MSC/Circ.646 for roll and pitch measurement have
no value unless associated with angle rate measurements, cf. Sec. 4.3.4 Structural deformation Mis en forme : Police :Italique
measurementsStructural deformation measurements Dynamic deformations of the ships
girder, p. 43 of the present report. They are then not included by the CSs in the minimal set.
As the vast majority of the installed HSMS have only the minimal set of sensors, the review of
the CSs rules is focused on this.
3.4.1.2 INTERNAL DATA STORAGE AND DATA BACKUP
All the installed HSMS have internal data storage and data backup well above the CSs minimal
requirements, cf. Sec. 3.6 Survey of existing HSMSsSurvey of existing HSMSs Answer to the Mis en forme : Accentuation
question 4.3), p. 24. The CSs rules concerning them are nevertheless reported.
3.4.2 AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING
3.4.2.1 SOURCE
(ABS) Guide for Hull Condition Monitoring 2003
3.4.2.2 PHILOSOPHY
The philosophy adopted by ABS is to specify the functions required for each notation. The
appropriateness of the sensors to the functions will be assessed case by case.
3.4.2.3 CLASS NOTATIONS
The ABS class notations are represented by the symbols HM1, HM2, HM3 and +R and a notation
inside each symbol. The notations are hopefully self-explanatory. When useful, a succinct
explanation is added.
HM1: Motion Monitoring
Notations:
o Slam Warning
o Green Seas Warning
o Ship Motion
HM2: Stress Monitoring
Notations:
o Hull Girder Stress
o Local Stress Monitor
o Fatigue Monitor
8
HM3: Voyage Data Recording7

Notations:
o VDR
Compliance with the IMO A.861(20) resolution
24 hours of recording
Four hours of UPS
Recording of the raw data, except for the radar
o Enhanced VDR
The same requirements as for the VDR notation +
Greater recording times:
< 40 00 dwt 15 days
40 000 < < 100 000 dwt 30 days
< 100 000 dwt 45 days
More stringent survivability criterion
+R: Provision for data recording for later evaluation
Recording of processed data rather than raw data as far as is possible
Continuous recording between the shippings for analysis (maximum interval:
three months)
The minimal set as described in Sec. 3.4.1.1 would give the notation HM2 Hull Girder Stress
+R.
3.4.2.4 SENSORS SPECIFICATIONS
o LBSGs
Accuracy: < 5 strain
Frequency range: 0 5 Hz
o Accelerometers
Accuracy: < 0.01 g
3.4.2.5 SENSORS SETTING AND CALIBRATION
o Set-up of the sensors in a known loading condition

o Recalibration of the sensors at least annually
3.4.2.6 RECORD SAMPLING RATE
o Hint: Three times the maximal frequency of the frequency range
3.4.2.7 RECORD RESOLUTION
o Not specified
7
This symbol is only about VDR, not HSMS. Its appearance is the Guide for Hull Condition Monitoring is curious.
9
3.4.2.8 REQUESTED RESULTS
o For all symbols and all sensors

Mean value,
Standard deviation,
Maximal peak to peak value,
Mean zero crossing period.
o HM1: Motion Monitoring

Slam Warning
Slam trend,
Slam warning.
Green Seas Warning
Green seas trend,
Green seas warning.
Ship Motion
Motion trend,
Motion warning.
o HM2: Stress Monitoring

Hull Girder Stress
Still water loads and corresponding warnings,
Wave loads and corresponding warnings,
R+: Histograms of wave load stress peaks.
Local Stress Monitoring
Stresses warning.
Fatigue Monitor
Rainflow counting and Miners sum technique.
o HM3: Voyage Data Recording

VDR
Cf. Sec. 3.4.2.3 above.
Enhanced VDR
Cf. Sec. 3.4.2.3 above.
3.4.2.9 INTERNAL DATA STORAGE
o One set of processed data once a week during the voyage (for the purpose of
verifying that all sensors are working properly)
3.4.2.10 DATA BACKUP
o Cf. the +R notation
10
3.4.2.11 UPS
o No UPS specified
3.4.2.12 INTERFACE WITH A VDR
o No interface with a VDR specified
3.4.3 BUREAU VERITAS
3.4.3.1 SOURCE
(BVs) Rules for Classification of Steel Ships (2008), Pt 9: Additional Installations, Ch. 6: Hull
Monitoring Systems
3.4.3.2 PHILOSOPHY
The philosophy adopted by BV is to specify the data to be obtained, not the sensors themselves,
and the required results.
The BV class notation is MON-HULL. There is no provision for extensions.

The minimum set of sensors has to give the longitudinal strain in the main deck in one location,
the vertical acceleration at the bow and the transverse acceleration. The types of the sensors to be
used are not specified.
Resolution8: < 7 % of the full displayed range

No frequency range specified
o Not specified
o Not specified
o Still water bending moment warnings
8
Probably accuracy.
11
o Wave bending moment warnings based on statistical analysis

Mean value,
Standard deviation,
Maximal peak to peak value,
Spectrum.
o The data storage can be in the HSMS or in the IBS, if any

o No record duration specified
o The integrity of the recorded data has to be ensured
o No data backup specified
3.4.3.11 UPS
o 30 min
3.4.4 DET NORSK VERITAS
3.4.4.1 SOURCE
(DNVs) Rules for Classification of Ship / Rules for Classification of High Speed, Light Craft
and Naval Surface Craft, Pt 6 Ch. 11: Hull Monitoring Systems, January 2005
3.4.4.2 PHILOSOPHY
The philosophy adopted by DNV is to specify in detail every component of the system, including
the treatment to be applied, and the required results.
The DNV class notation is represented by the symbol HMON ( ) where within the brackets there
are letters specifying what type of sensors and/or features are included in the system and digits
specifying the number of each type of sensors and/or features. The meaning of the letters is
reproduced below.
A Sensor monitoring acceleration along one axis
C Online link to loading computer that is continuously up-dating the loading condition
D Online data link between the hull monitoring system onboard to office ashore. The link
shall make it possible to operate the system from an onshore computer, perform
maintenance and transfer data
12
E Sensor monitoring the propulsion shaft(s) output/rpm

G Sensor monitoring global hull strain
H Sensor monitoring the liquid motion pressures in tanks (sloshing)
L Sensor monitoring local hull strain
M Device for monitoring of hull rigid body motions (six degrees of freedom)
N Measured data to be stored in Nauticus
O Navigation sensors (GPS, speed log, gyro compass, rudder angle etc.)
P Sensor monitoring the sea pressure acting on the hull
S Device for monitoring the sea-state
T Sensor monitoring the temperature
W Wind sensor
From this list we can see that the HMON notation covers more than simply the hull strain
monitoring. The minimal system as described in Sec. 3.4.1.1 would give the notation HMON
(G4,A1).
DNV defines precisely the sensors to be fitted for each type of vessel (cf. Table F1 of the Rules).
o Strain gauges
DNV does not specify explicitly the type of the strain gauges. It specifies only that
the measurements have to give the global longitudinal stresses (strains).
Accuracy: < the greater of 20 strain or 3 % of the measured value
o Accelerometers
Accuracy: < the greater of 0.01 g or 2 % of the measured value
o Frequency ranges
The frequency range depends on the purpose of the sensor. The frequency ranges
where the specified accuracies are obtained must be
motions, wave loading: 0.01 3 Hz,
slamming: 5 100 Hz,
sloshing: 30 1200 Hz.

o Recalibration of the sensors at least annually
For sensors measuring

motions, wave loading: 20 Hz,
slamming: 500 Hz,
sloshing: 3 kHz.
o Not specified
13
o Measurements of all sensors with four filtering processes:

No filtering,
High-pass filtering (the wave response and the vibrations are kept, static value
and low cycle temperature fluctuations are removed),
Low-pass filtering (the static value and low cycle temperature fluctuations are
kept),
High-pass filtering (the vibrations are kept).
o For all sensors, warning and trend predictions for statistical parameters of the four
time series described above:
Minimal and maximal values,
Mean value,
Standard deviation,
Skewness,
Kurtosis,
Mean zero crossing period,
Peak histogram.
o Fatigue analysis
Stress cycle counting.
o One year of processed data

o 24 hours of raw data
o In text format and self explanatory

o One year of processed data
o 48 hours of raw data
3.4.4.11 UPS
o 10 min
o Has to comply with IEC 61162
14
3.4.5 KOREAN REGISTER OF SHIPPING
3.4.5.1 SOURCE
(KRs) Rules for Classification of Steel Ships (2008), Pt 9: Additional Installations, Ch. 6: Hull
Monitoring Systems
3.4.5.2 PHILOSOPHY
The philosophy adopted by KR is to specify the physical system (sensors, display, data storage)
and the treatments applied to the data.
The KR class notations are HMS or HMS1:

HMS: The minimal system
HMS1: The HMS system plus the recording of
o the ship position, speed and direction9,
o the wind speed and direction.
The minimal set of sensors would give the notation HMS.
o LBSGs
o Accelerometers
Accuracy: < 1 % of the measured value10
o Set-up of the sensors in a known loading condition and with temperature effects
minimized
o Verification of the sensors at least every six months
o Recalibration of the LBSGs at least annually
3.4.5.6 SAMPLING RATE
o Hint: Three times the maximal frequency of the frequency range
9
Probably heading.
10
This specification is curious.
15
o Not specified
o Warnings and trend predictions for statistical parameters of all sensor measurements:
Peak value,
Mean value,
Standard deviation,
o Fatigue analysis
Rainflow stress cycle counting.
o One set of processed data once a month during the voyage (for the purpose of
3.4.5.11 UPS
o 10 min
3.4.6 LLOYDS REGISTER OF SHIPPING
3.4.6.1 SOURCE
(LRs) Provisional Rules for the Classification of ship event analysis systems, January 2003
3.4.6.2 PHILOSOPHY
The philosophy adopted by LR is to specify every component of the system, the treatments to be
applied and the required results.
The LR class notation is represented by the descriptive note and optional extensions ShipRight
SEA(Hss-n, optional extensions)11. The extension -n signifies the number of strain gauges
connected to the system. The meanings of the optional extensions are reported below.
11
SEA: Ship Event Analysis.
16
L The display of the relevant information in the cargo control area

M The display and recording of the ships motion
N The facility to display and record navigational information
VDR An interface with the ships voyage data recorder system to enable the recording of hull
stress, ship motion and hull pressure information
From this list we can see that the ShipRight SEA(Hss-n, ) notation covers hull strain
monitoring and optionally motion monitoring.
The minimum set of sensors is two LBSGs and either one accelerometer or one sea water
pressure transducer at the bow. For ship of L above 150 m, at least four LBSGs are required. For
ships with large deck openings (container ship, box bulk carriers), these four LBSGs are to be
around the transverse section where the maximum longitudinal strain is expected.
The minimal system as described in Sec. 3.4.1.1 would give the notation ShipRight SEA(Hss-
4).
o LBSGs
o Accelerometers
Accuracy: < 0.02 g
o Sea water pressure transducers
Accuracy: < 0.025 bar
o Set-up of the sensors in a known loading condition and with temperature effects
minimized
o Verification of the set-up and of the calibration of the sensors at least annually
o Hint: Four times the maximal frequency of the frequency range
o Hint: 12 bits
Minimal and maximal values,
Minimal and maximal values due to wave loads,
Mean value,
17
Standard deviation,
Maximal peak to trough value,
Number of reversals,
Number of slams.
o Fatigue analysis
Stress ranges and cycles counting.
o No duration specified
o One month of data processed at intervals not greater than 10 min
3.4.6.11 UPS
o No UPS specified
o Has to comply with IEC 61162

o The data sent to the VDR is the processed data
3.4.7 NIPPON KAIJI KYOKAI
3.4.7.1 SOURCE
(NKs) Rules for Hull Monitoring Systems (valid at the date 07/2008)
3.4.7.2 PHILOSOPHY
The philosophy adopted by NK is to specify the physical system (sensors, display, data storage).
The treatments applied to the data are left to the discretion of the manufacturer.
The NK class notation is represented by the characters (the symbol) HMS with an extension R
in case the data is permanently recoded.
The minimal set of sensors is the one described in Sec. 3.4.1.1. For container ships, the
transverse acceleration around amidships have to be measured. The minimal system would give
the notation HMS R.
o Strain gauges
18
NK does not specify explicitly the type of the strain gauges. It specifies only that the
measurements have to give the global (longitudinal) stresses (strains).
o Accelerometers
Accuracy: < 0.01 g

o Recalibration of the sensors when deemed necessary
o Not specified
o Not specified
o Real-time measurements of all sensors
Peak value,
Mean value,
Standard deviation,
Number of slams.
o One set of processed data once a month during the voyage (for the purpose of
o For the HMS R notation: continuous recording of the processed data over a period of
one month
3.4.7.11 UPS
o No UPS required
19
o When linked to a VDR, the raw data have to be provided to the VDR all the time12.
o Interface not specified
3.4.8 COMMENTS ABOUT THESE SPECIFICATIONS
Individual CSs are clear most of the time about their requirements, however
there is a great disparity in the way HSMSs are specified,
some CSs include some VDR specifications in their HSMS specifications,
UPS requirements are not constant through the different CSs and are then not coherent with
the VDR requirements,
The processing to be applied to the sensors signals is not always precisely defined.
Some Common Rules about HSMSs would be useful.
3.5 HSMSS MANUFACTURERS

An internet search of present day manufacturers of HSMSs was conducted. The result is
presented in Table 1 below. This list is confined to companies manufacturing equipment with
strain measurements, to which other sensors like sea water pressure gauges or motion
measurements can be added. Companies manufacturing equipment without strain measurements,
for instance with only motion measurements plus other sensors, are not included in this list; this
would cover a too broad a range of companies.
Country
Name of the company URL Name of the HSMS
BMT Scientific Marine Services

USA http://www.scimar.com/ Structural Monitoring System
Inc.
BMT Seatech Ltd GBR http://www.bmtseatech.co.uk/ SMARTSTRESS
Light Structures AS NOR http://www.lightstructures.no/ SENSFIB
MCA Consulting USA http://www.mcaco.com/ Hull Monitoring System
R. Rouvari Oy FIN http://www.rrouvari.fi/ Hullmos
Sea Structure Technology Co. Ltd KOR http://www.sst21c.com/ Naviscan
Strainstall UK Ltd GBR http://www.strainstall.com/ StressAlert II
Weir-Jones Ltd CAN http://www.weir-jones.com/ No information
Table 1: Manufacturers of HSMSs (January 2009)
12
The actual wording of this clause is: Where the voyage data recorder system (VDR) is installed onboard, the VDR
system is to record real-time information of the stress and acceleration at the all time. As such, this clause is about
VDR, not about HSMS.
20
3.6 SURVEY OF EXISTING HSMSS
3.6.1 PRESENTATION
A survey in the form of a questionnaire was conducted among the HSMSs manufacturers. This
survey was specifically oriented towards the HSMS features seen from a VDR point of view.
This means
physical and logical interface between HSMS and VDR,
validity and veracity of data provided,
accident analysis capability from data provided:
o structural damage tracing capabilities,
o perception that the crew has of the situation,
playback of the data.
Three manufacturers answered. The results are reported below.
3.6.2 ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE
1 INTERFACING OF YOUR SYSTEM WITH OTHER EQUIPMENTS
Q: 1.1) Do you have any experience of interfacing your system with other equipments?
A: All installed HSMSs are interfaced with other equipments.
Q: 1.2) For the processed data, which standards do you use for this interface
IEC 61162-X?
Other international standard?
Proprietary?
A: All manufacturers offer either IEC 61162-1/102 or the equivalent NMEA 0183 standards,
sometimes supplemented with proprietary strings. Other standards (Modbus) may be used
from case to case.
Q: 1.3) If the other equipment is a VDR, which data do you record on it?
A: Diagnostic byte, alarms status
Processed data
Q: 1.4) If the other equipment is a VDR, is there a possibility of playing back the data recorded
on it,
with a proprietary code supplied by yourselves?
with an open code?
A: Playback is not a standard feature but can be implemented if required.
21
Q: 1.5) Is the raw data available as an output that could be fed to other equipments?
A1: No
A2: It is not a standard feature but can be implemented if required.
A3: Yes
Q: 1.6) What is the sampling rate?

A1: Configurable:
Typical: 20 Hz
Maximum: 500 Hz13
A2: 1 kHz
Q: 1.7) What are the typical and maximum numbers of channels?

A: Typical: 5
Maximum: from 16 to more than 100
2 VALIDITY OF THE DATA PROVIDED
2.1-VALIDITY OF THE MEASUREMENTS
Q: 2.1.1) Setting-up and calibration of the sensors?

In short, setting-up and calibration of the sensors follow the Class requirements. Most CSs
specify at least a yearly check of the setting-up and of the calibration.
LBSGs
A: Setting-up in a known loading condition
Calibration by inserting feeler gauges
Vertical accelerometer
A: Setting-up and calibration by tilting the accelerometer (static test)14
Other sensors
A: Setting-up and calibration follow the Class requirement, which may reefer to the sensors
manufacturer procedure.
Fibre optic sensors (strain gauges, accelerometers, sea water pressure, temperature) do not need
onboard setting-up and calibration.
13
DNV Class notation requires a sampling rate of 500 Hz for equipment meant to measure slamming and of 3 kHz
for equipment meant to measure sloshing.
14
Some CSs specify that setting-up and calibration must not require special equipment (test bench) onboard. This
limits the setting-up and calibration possibilities.
22
2.2 KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONFIGURATION AND OF THE STATE OF THE SYSTEM
Q: 2.2.1) Is the present configuration of the system (sensors ID, filter setting, setting-up,
calibrations, connections, sampling rates, channel allocations, etc.) recorded?
A: Yes
Q: 2.2.2) Is the history of the changes of configuration recorded?

A: Yes
Q: 2.2.3) Is the state of the system (sensors, communication and processing states) recorded?
A: Yes
2.3 VERACITY OF THE DATA PROVIDED
Q: 2.3.1) Is there a protection against tampering in your system?

A: Yes, by password-restricted access
Q: 2.3.2) Is there a log of the system?

A: Yes. One manufacturer produces an encrypted log file.
3 DISPLAYS
Q: 3.1) What is the number of independent displays15 on your system?

A: One
Q: 3.2) What is the number of screens16 on your system?

A: Total: from 10 to 15
Used in operational situation: from 3 to 10
Q: 3.3) What is the resolution and number of colours of displays normally used?
A1: 1280 x 1024 x 16 bits
A2: 1024 x 768 x 32 bits
(the manufacturers use the standard PC graphic-card settings)
Q: 3.4) What is the shortest update interval of the displays?

A: One second
15
The physical devices.
16
The images.
23
4 DATA RECORDED IN YOUR SYSTEM
Q: 4.1) Which recording medium do you use?

A: Internal:
PC hard disk
Back-up:
Removable flash disk
Satellite link
Ships e-mail system
Q: 4.2) Which data do you record?

A: State of the system
Raw data
Processed data
Q: 4.3) What is the longest period that you can record before overwriting?
A: Raw data: from 24 hours to one month
Processed data: ships life
Q: 4.4) Do you have any experience of (structural) damage or accident analysis using this
record?
A1: No
A2: Yes
5 DETECTION OF SLAMMING AND SLOSHING
Q: 5.1) Could you explain how the slamming is detected?

A: Slamming is detected as a vertical acceleration in the bow with the procedure recommended
by the CSs17. Slamming is also sometimes detected by strain gauges installed in the hull
plating or in stiffeners.
Q: 5.2) Could you explain how the sloshing is detected?

A1: Sloshing is detected by pressure gauges mounted in the primary insulation layer of the
containment system.
A2: Sloshing is detected by the vibrations (the sound) associated with liquid impact on tank
walls. These vibrations are measured by accelerometers.
17
For instance for LR, this procedure is defined by: Where a bow accelerometer is used for the
detection of slams, the occurrence of a slam can be identified by the existence of vibratory bow acceleration in the
two-node mode vibration frequency of the hull girder, the amplitude of which declines with time.
24
6 EFFECTIVE CARRIAGE OF HSMSS
Q: 6.1) At a world level, what are the types of ship equipped with HSMSs?
A: The ships fitted with HSMSs are mostly tankers, bulk carriers and sometimes container
carriers:
Crude carriers: from 100 000 dwt (displacement 115 000 t),
Product carriers: from 35 000 dwt (displacement 47 000 t),
LNG carriers: from 200 000 m3 (displacement 140 000 t),
Bulk carriers: from 100 000 dwt (displacement 115 000 t),
Container carrier: only special arrangements.
Q: 6.2) Is there specificity for the European ships owners?

A1: Europeans owners install HSMSs; Japanese and Chinese owners very seldom.
A2: No such specificity is evident in our records.
3.6.3 COMMENTS
3.6.3.1 PHYSICAL / LOGICAL INTERFACE
All manufacturers provide their system with IEC 61162-1/102 or the equivalent NMEA 0183,
which are low speed serial data transmission standards. The physical standards used are EIA 422
(ITU-T X.27/V.11)18.
3.6.3.2 PROVIDING OF THE PROCESSED DATA
Providing of the processed data to the VDR is a standard feature for all manufacturers. The
information content is low (say 10 statistical results x 5 sensors for the minimal system x 3 types
of filtering (for DNVs Class), at a time interval of 5 min). This represents about 1% of the IEC
61162-1/102 interface capacity.
3.6.3.3 PROVIDING OF THE RAW DATA
Providing of the raw data to the VDR is or can be possible but is not considered at the moment
by the manufacturers.
3.6.3.4 PROVIDING OF THE SCREENS
Providing of the screens to the VDR is not considered at the moment by the manufacturers.
3.6.3.5 PLAYBACK
Providing of playback means is possible but is not considered at the moment by the
manufacturers.
18
These are the new names of the original RS 422.
25
4 Fitness of HSMS for accident analysis
4.1 IS THE MINIMAL HSMS FIT FOR ACCIDENT ANALYSIS?

From the description of the goals of HSMSs in Sec. 3.1, reinforced by the descriptions of the
CSs rules in Sec. 3.4 and by the survey in Sec. 3.6, we can see that the goal of present day
HSMSs is only to estimate some structural load (from the bow acceleration) and some structural
deformations (from the LBSGs), and the estimations provided are only statistical. This is deemed
sufficient for operational purposes. The data provided by a minimal HSMS to a VDR are now
examined for fitness for accident analysis.
4.1.1 PROCESSED DATA / RAW DATA
The norm in present day HSMSs is to send only the processed data to the VDR. These statistical
results can only give probabilities of occurrence of structural damages. This is not sufficient to
allow reconstruction of the event sequence of an accident. For this, temporal data is necessary.
As this could be provided to the VDR, the analysis of the following sections considers that this
data is recorded in the VDR.
4.1.2 LBSGS
A LBSG gives the value of the strain averaged between its two ends. The aim being to measure
the longitudinal strain, the LBSGs are oriented in this direction.
For the amidships section, under the hypothesis of a given distance between the LBSGs and the
horizontal and vertical neutral fibres, the measurements on the two sides of the deck give an
estimate of the horizontal and vertical bending (i.e. radii of curvature) of the ships girder. This
estimate is global for the section where the LBSGs are located, but concerns only this section.
For the sections at 0.25 L from the bow and from the stern, the measurements on only one side of
the deck do not allow to distinguish between the horizontal and vertical bending. The hypothesis
adopted is actually that the horizontal bending in these sections are negligible.
A LBSG measures the strain in only one direction. The shear strains are therefore not measured.
The vertical static shear strains are assessed by the loading computer. Vessels with large deck
openings, like container ships or box bulk carriers, are subject to significant torsional shear
strains, which add to the vertical shear strains. These torsional strains are estimated by
computation for given sea states.
As a summary, the low number of LBSGs and the fact that they do not measure shear strains
give a very partial view of the strains of the structure. This view gives an estimate of the strains
of the whole structure only under the following conditions:
the structure is undamaged,
the static loading is known:
o the estimation of the actual static loading is true,
o the cargo is in a normal position,
o no compartment is flooded,
actual waves satisfy the hypotheses used in the structural computations (no exceptional
waves).
26
For accident analysis involving a structural damage, by definition, at least one of these
hypotheses is not fulfilled. There is then very little chance that the measurements given by the
minimal set of LBSGs will allow reconstruction of the scenario of such accident.
4.1.3 BOW ACCELEROMETER
The aim of the measurement of the vertical acceleration at the bow is to estimate the impact of
the water on the forefoot of the vessel. This is used for detecting the occurrence of slamming.
This measurement can be useful to determine whether structural damage, detected by others
means, has been produced by a slam. This sensor itself does not give directly any information
about the occurrence of damage.
4.1.4 CONCLUSION
The raw data provided by the minimal HSMS to the VDR would be of very little use for
reconstructing the scenario of an accident; the set of sensors used does not provide enough
information. This can be restated in another way: on one hand, the function of a HSMS is to
avoid an overload of the structure. The detection of damage and the provision of reliable
information in case of damaged structure are beyond its scope. On the other hand, accident
analysis involving the use of HSMS data has to deal with damaged structures. These two
functions have no overlap.
4.2 HSMS IN CASE OF STRUCTURAL DAMAGE

As stated in the preceding section, the data provided today by the minimal HSMS would be of
very little use for accident analysis. To analyse this deficiency more precisely some computation
of deformation of failed structure is performed below.
4.2.1 TYPES OF STRUCTURAL FAILURES
In mechanical structures, there are only two fundamental modes of failures: buckling and
yielding (i.e. permanent deformation):
Buckling is the instability of the structure above a given compressive19 load. This load depends
on the geometry of the structure, including its geometrical defaults, and on the elastic moduli of
the material used.
Yielding occurs when either the tensile or shear strains exceed given values (tensile or shear
yield strains). These thresholds diminish with the fatigue accumulated by the material. The
ultimate form of yielding is fracture.
These two modes of failure interact in a chain of causes and effects: buckling of a structure
produces an overstraining of the material which can result in its yielding. Yielding changes the
geometry of the structure, that is then more likely to buckle.
Both failure modes can be represented by the loss of a portion of the structure.
These failure modes exist at all length scales in a ship structure, from structural details to the
whole ship deemed as single girder.
19
A buckling under a shear force is in fact a buckling under a compressive force.
27
The distinction between failure and damage is only a question of length scale: as all structures
considered in practice are hyperstatic, a failure at a small scale does not imply the failure of the
whole structure; the whole structure is only damaged: it can continue to carry out its function
with lower performance.
4.2.2 COMPUTATION OF THE DEFORMATIONS IN CASE OF STRUCTURAL DAMAGE
Only structural damage occurring during normal sailing are considered. For damage resulting
from collision or grounding, the causes of the damage are obvious.
4.2.2.1 SHIP CHOSEN
The ship chosen for these computations is the container ship Liverpool Bay, whose structure is
fully documented in 20. The main particulars of the ship are given in Table 2 below.
Length B.P. 274.32 m

Length overall 289.55 m
Breadth moulded 32.26 m
Depth moulded 26.60 m
Design draught 10.97 m
Design deadweight 34 570 tonnes
Design displacement 58 830 tonnes
Table 2: Main particulars of the container ship Liverpool Bay
4.2.2.2 CONDITIONS
For all the computations, the ships speed is 13.38 m/s (26 knots) and the sea state is an ISSC
1967 unidirectional spectrum of Hs 5 m and T1 10 s.
4.2.2.3 COMPUTATION OF THE DEFORMATIONS
Only the symmetric deformations are computed, i.e. the vertical bending and the vertical shear
deformation. The computations of these deformations are performed with the code uclmars12.
The theoretical background of this code is exposed in 21 and 22. This is a hydro-elastic code
developed for computing the behaviour of ship structures in waves. The structure is represented
by a non-uniform Timoshenko beam23 and the hydrodynamic behaviour is computed with a
20
Meek M., Adams R., Chapman J. C., Reibelt H. and Wieske P., The Structural Design of the O.C.L. Container
Ships, Trans. RINA, 114, pp. 241-292, 1972.
21
Bishop R. E. D. and Price W. G., "On Modal Analysis of Ship Distortions in Still Water", Trans. RINA, 119, 151-
160, 1977.
22
Betts C. V., Bishop R. E. D. and Price W. G., "The Symmetric Generalised Fluid Forces Applied to a Ship in a
Seaway", Trans. RINA, 119, 265-278, 1977.
23
In the Timoshenko beam theory, the shear deformation is taken into account, which is not the case in the usual
Euler-Bernoulli theory.
28
slender ship theory (strip theory). Examples of applications are given in 24. Validation against
full scale experiments is presented in 25 and against finite element codes in 26.
Damage considered
The damage considered is represented by a loss of 30 % on the second moment of area of a ship
section. Given a typical safety factor for the ships structures of approximately two; this
represents a loss of roughly half of the safety margin. The locations for the damage are given in
Table 3 below. These locations are chosen so that the damage is away from the measurements
sections, which are at 0.25, 0.50 and 0.75 L.
x/L damage
[ad]
Damage 1 0.125
Damage 2 0.375
Damage 3 0.625
Damage 4 0.875
Table 3: Locations of the damage
Results
The results shown in Table 4 below are the vertical bending moments in the measurement
sections. These sections being supposed to be undamaged, the strains measured by the LBSGs
are proportional to these bending moments. The results are presented as variations of the bending
moment due to the damage referred to the undamaged condition.
The maximal variation of the bending moment is -2.46 % of 1.3 GN m (x/L 0.5, damage 3,
heading 180 ). The modulus of the amidships section at upper deck is 32.8 m3, cf. 20, Sec. 6,
Table XII. The corresponding strain variation is then -4.7 strain.
The strain variations above and the accuracy for the LBSGs specified by the CSs are of the same
order of magnitude: Unless the damage is in a LBSGs section the strain variations due to
significant damage are not detectable.
The existing minimal HSMSs cannot detect any damage outside their sections of
measurement; this may give the shipmaster a false sense of safety.
24
Bishop R. E. D., Price W. G. and Tam P. K. Y., "A Unified Dynamic Analysis of Ship Response to Waves",
Trans. RINA, 119, pp 363-390, 1977.
25
Bishop R. E. D., Clarke J. D., Price W. G., "Comparison of Full Scale and Precicted Responses of Two Frigates in
a Severe Weather Trial", Trans. RINA, 126, 153-166, 1984.
26
Price W. G., Salas Inzunza M. and Temarel P., "The Dynamic Behaviour of a Mono-Hull in Oblique Waves using
Two- and Three Dimensional Fluid-Structure Interaction Models", Trans. RINA, 144, 2002.
29
Heading
[]
27
x/L 0 45 135 180
Meas.
Undamaged: [GN*m] Undamaged: [GN*m] Undamaged: [GN*m] Undamaged: [GN*m]

[ad]
Variation: [%] Variation: [%] Variation: [%] Variation: [%]
Undamaged 0.484 0.360 0.560 0.636
Var. dam. 1 0.08 0.14 0.02 0.41
0.25 Var. dam. 2 0.04 -0.17 0.16 -2.08
Var. dam. 3 -0.37 -0.08 -0.21 -2.36
Var. dam. 4 -0.10 -0.08 0.02 0.09
Undamaged 0.831 0.808 1.154 1.300
Var. dam. 1 -0.08 0.02 0.00 0.31
0.50 Var. dam. 2 -0.04 -0.11 0.09 -2.00
Var. dam. 3 -0.43 -0.10 -0.17 -2.46
Var. dam. 4 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.08
Undamaged 0.415 0.386 0.438 0.486
Var. dam. 1 -0.10 -0.08 -0.02 0.21
0.75 Var. dam. 2 -0.10 -0.08 0.00 -1.40
Var. dam. 3 -0.22 -0.10 -0.14 -1.44
Var. dam. 4 0.19 0.13 0.09 0.16
Table 4: Bending moments in undamaged and damaged conditions
4.3 STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING

HSMSs should evolve to gain structural damage-detection capability. This is the subject of
structural health monitoring (SHM). This approach has been developed since the 70s, first in
offshore engineering, then in aeronautics and civil engineering, cf. the excerpt of 28 Sec. 2 quoted
below:
During the 1970s and 1980s, the oil industry made considerable efforts to develop
vibration-based damage-detection methods for offshore platforms. This damage-
detection problem is fundamentally different from that of rotating machinery
because the damage location is unknown and because the majority of the
structure is not readily accessible for measurement. To circumvent these
difficulties, a common methodology adopted by this industry was to simulate
candidate damage scenarios with numerical models, examine the changes in
resonant frequencies that were produced by these simulated changes, and
correlate these changes with those measured on a platform. A number of very
practical problems were encountered including measurement difficulties caused
27
Following sea.
28
Farrar C. R., Doebling S. W. and Nix D. A., Vibration-Based Structural Damage Identification, Phil. Trans. R.
Soc. Lond. A, 359, 1778, pp. 131-149, 15 January 2001.
30
by platform machine noise, instrumentation difficulties in hostile environments,

changing mass caused by marine growth and varying fluid storage levels,
temporal variability of foundation conditions, and the inability of wave motion to
excite higher modes. These issues prevented adaptation of this technology, and
efforts at further developing this technology for offshore platforms were largely
abandoned in the early 1980s.
The aerospace community began to study the use of vibration-based damage
detection during the late 1970s and early 1980s in conjunction with the
development of the space shuttle. This work has continued with current
applications being investigated for the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration's space station and reusable launch vehicle. The Shuttle Modal
Inspection System (SMIS) was developed to identify fatigue damage in
components such as control surfaces, fuselage panels and lifting surfaces. These
areas were covered with a thermal protection system making these portions of the
shuttle inaccessible and hence impractical for conventional local non-destructive
examination methods. This system has been successful in locating damaged
components that are covered by the thermal protection system. All orbiter
vehicles have been periodically subjected to SMIS testing since 1987. Space
station applications have primarily driven the development of
experimental/analytical damage-detection methods. These approaches are based
on correlating analytical models of the undamaged structure with measured
modal properties from both the undamaged and damaged structure. Changes in
stiffness indices as assessed from the two model updates are used to locate and
quantify the damage. Since the mid 1990s, studies of damage detection for
composite materials have been motivated by the development of composite fuel
tanks for a reusable launch vehicle.
The civil engineering community has studied vibration-based damage assessment
of bridge structures since the early 1980s. Modal properties and quantities
derived from these properties such as mode-shape curvature and dynamic
flexibility matrix indices have been the primary features used to identify damage
in bridge structures. Environmental and operating condition variability present
significant challenges to the bridge monitoring application. Regulatory
requirements in eastern Asian countries, which mandate the companies that
construct the bridges to periodically certify their structural health, are driving
current research and development of vibration- based bridge monitoring systems.
The fact that SHM has been abandoned for offshore platforms must not stop us considering it for
ships. The two fields share some commonalities but also have differences. Since the 70s, the
SHM techniques may also have evolved; this field of research and development is very active.
A general review of SHM can be found in 29. From a technological point of view, SHM for ships
would be closer to civil engineering than to aeronautics. Ship building and civil engineering use
both low grade material and therefore do not want to rely on costly technology for the
surveillance of the structures. We focus then in this study on the civil engineering experience.
29
Sohn H. et al., A Review of Structural Health Monitoring Literature: 1996-2001, Los Alamos National
Laboratory Report, LA-13976-MS, 2003.
31
A review of SHM in this field is given in 30 Sec. 7. SHM is defined there (introductory
paragraph) by
the use of in-situ, non-destructive sensing and analysis of structural
characteristics, including the structural response, for detecting changes that may
indicate damage or degradation.
Structural deterioration or damage is defined as a change in stiffness of the structural element.
Failure of the whole structure is the ultimate state of damage.
SHM in civil engineering has evolved and has now a broader scope: a classification of the SHM
levels adopted today in this community is
Level 1: Damage detection: determination of the occurrence of a damage,
Level 2: Damage localisation: determination of the location of the damage,
Level 3: Damage quantification: determination of the severity of the damage,
Level 4: Damage consequence assessment: prediction of the remaining service life of the
structure.
Ship masters and ship owners have manifestly the same needs as civil engineers.
The definition given in 30 Sec. 7 covers only the Level 1 of this classification. Today, Levels 2
and above are mostly at a research stage. They require a mathematical model of the structure.
Another classification is the distinction between global and local SHM, cf. 30 Sec. 7.1.3:
Health monitoring techniques may be classified as global or local. Global
methods attempt to simultaneously assess the condition of the whole structure
whereas local methods focus NDE (non-destructive damage evaluation) tools on
specific structural components.
At the present stage of HSMSs, the level of SHM to be aimed is clearly Level 1 and at global
scale: the first goal is to detect that damage is occurring somewhere. Localisation of the damage
and estimation of its severity can only be achieved when this goal is achieved.
4.3.1 DAMAGE-OCCURRENCE DETECTION
The fundamental principle used in damage-occurrence detection is a theorem from Rayleigh

saying that when a constraint is released in a structure, the modal frequencies shift to lower
values. The core technique used for damage-occurrence detection is then modal analysis, which
identifies the modal parameters of the system, i.e. modal frequencies, damping coefficients and
mode shapes.
To identify a system, either a known excitation (input-output analysis) or an ambient one
(output-only analysis) can be used. In the case of a ship in operation, only an ambient excitation
approach is possible. At the modal frequencies of the ship, the most important excitations are the
main engine and propeller fluctuating forces and the hydrodynamic impacts due to waves.
Nonlinear hydrodynamic phenomenon can also produce excitation at the mode frequencies
(springing), but this is a second order phenomenon.
30
Housner G. W. et al., "Structural control: past, present, and future", J. Eng. Mech., ASCE, 123, 9, pp. 897-971,
September 1997.
32
The main methods used in the output-only approach are described for instance in 31 (quoted
below):
Peak picking (PP)

This is the simplest known method for identifying the modal parameters of a
structure. The peak picking method is initially based on the fact that the frequency
response function goes through an extremum around the natural frequencies. The
frequency at which this extremum occurs is a good estimate for the
eigenfrequency.

The peak picking method is a kind of frequency domain technique. Frequency
domain algorithms have been the most popular, mainly due to their simplicity and
processing speed, and also for historical reasons. These algorithms, however,
involve averaging temporal information, thus discarding most of their details.
Peak picking technique has some theoretical drawbacks such as
picking the peaks is always a subjective task;
operational deflection shapes are obtained instead of mode shapes;
only real modes or proportionally damped structures can be deduced by the
method;
damping estimates are unreliable. In spite of these drawbacks of the method
the peak picking technique is often used in civil engineering practice for
ambient vibration measurements because it is fast and easy to apply.
This method cannot then be automated and is difficult to use in unsteady ambient excitation.
Stochastic Subspace Identification (SSI)

This method is a system identification technique based on stochastic assumptions. The system to
identify is deemed linear and is thus represented, in the discrete time form, by
xk +1 = A xk +1 + wk
(1)
yk = C xk +1 + vk
where, xk +1 is the discrete time state vector of the system, A is the discrete time state matrix, wk
is a process noise, vk is a measurement noise and yk is the output. The input, being unknown,
has been suppressed from the representation. It is replaced by the process noise vk . The
stochastic hypotheses used for identifying the model are that the noises vk and wk are
uncorrelated white spectrum signals. Yet from 31,
Equation (1) constitutes the basis for the time-domain system identification
through ambient vibration measurements. There have been several techniques to
realize system identification algorithms based on Equation (1). The stochastic
subspace identification algorithm is probably the most advanced method known
31
De Roeck G., Peeters B. and Ren W.-X., Benchmark Study on System Identification through Ambient Vibration
Measurements, Proc. IMAC 18 (18th International Modal Analysis Conference), pp. 1106-1112, San Antonio,
Texas, USA, February 2000.
33
up to date for ambient vibration measurement system identification. The subspace

method identifies the state space matrices based on the measurements and by
using robust numerical techniques such as QR-factorization, singular value
decomposition (SVD) and least squares. Loosely said, the QR results in a
significant data reduction, whereas the SVD is used to reject the noise (assumed
to be represented by the higher singular values). Once the mathematical
description of the structure (the state space model) is found, it is straightforward
to determine the modal parameters (by an eigenvalue decomposition): natural
frequencies, damping ratios and mode shapes.
A general review of the methods based on Eq. (1) is presented in 32.
An example of application of the PP and SSI techniques is shown in 33. Fifteen different
acceptable points of damage were created on the bridge. The conclusion of this study is
From the tests on the Swiss bridge Z24 the following conclusions can be drawn:
Reliable modal information can be obtained by output-only dynamic
measurements, i.e. accelerations are due to ambient influences. Traffic under
or on top of the bridge can be the cause of the induced vibrations. So closing
the bridge to apply controlled force excitation is not necessary.
The variations between eigenfrequencies obtained by different system
identification algorithms are rather small. For the mode shapes more
substantial differences occur.
Peak picking on (averaged normalized) Power Spectral Density functions is a
quick way to look to eigenfrequencies and mode shapes and can be
recommended for an on side quality check of the measurements.
The most accurate results were obtained with the stochastic subspace
identification method. With this method also closely spaced modes can be
separated. The use of this method was greatly facilitated by the development
of a GUI (MACEC).
Changes in environmental conditions, mainly temperature, lead to changes in
eigenfrequencies. The order of magnitude being similar to that of structural
damage, it is important to filter (eliminate) this environmental influence
beforehand. This also means that a monitoring system should include
temperature measurements. The relation between eigenfrequencies and
temperature can be obtained by the measurements of the intact bridge over a
period of at least one year. For bridge Z24 the decrease of the first
eigenfrequency for a temperature increase from 0 to 30C is about 3 %.
When this correction is taken into account, the uncertainty interval is 0.7 %
corresponding to the 95 % confidence limits.
The applied damage scenarios cause eigenfrequency shifts up to 7 %. Damage
has a selective influence on the eigenmodes: especially those eigenmodes will
be affected where damage occurs at zones with high modal curvatures. This is
32
Peeters B. and De Roeck G., Stochastic System Identification for Operational Modal Analysis: A Review, J. of
Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 123, 4, pp. 659-667, December 2001.
33
De Roeck G., Peeters B. and Maeck J., Dynamic monitoring of civil engineering structures, Proc. IASS-IACM
2000 (Fourth International Colloquium on Computation of Shell & Spatial Structures), Chania, Greece, 4-7 June
2000.
34
also a way to make the distinction between environmental and structural

changes.
Only damage scenarios that produce stiffness reductions could be identified.
For instance this was the case for the support settlement. A loss of prestress
will only result in a measurable change in eigenfrequencies if it is
accompanied by originating cracks.
Mode shapes, although less accurately determined than eigenfrequencies, can
provide useful information about local changes, e.g. of support stiffness.
Important information is that, at least for concrete, the variation of modal frequencies with
temperature is of the same order as their variation for acceptable damages (7 %). However, for a
steel structure, the situation should be better: the relative variation of steel Youngs modulus E
with temperature is of 0.033 %/C that is 1 % for 30C. The modal frequencies being
proportional to E , their variation for this temperature variation would be 0.5 %. This is the
order of magnitude of the uncertainty interval of the frequency identification ( 0.7 %): for steel
structures the influence of temperature is not important, but is not negligible too. The
temperature of the structure should then be measured.
Other authors, for instance 34, do not believe in the practicality of the SSI method.
To assess the chances of success in applying of SHM to ships, the similarities and differences
between ships and offshore platforms, in what has caused the failure of this application, are
sketched.
Measurement difficulties caused by platform machine noise

In ships, main engines are far away from the deck. Pollution of measurements by this noise is
less a problem for them.
Mis en forme : Anglais (tats-Unis)
Instrumentation difficulties in hostile environments
This difficulty is the same but today the technology is mastered: HSMS are installed routinely on
ships.
Changing mass caused by marine growth and varying fluid storage levels
On one hand, loading variations of ships are much more important than those of offshore
platforms. On the other, as the fouling of ships has a direct influence on their performance and as
they can be cleaned, fouling is less a problem for them. This problem can be overcome by
recording reference cases for all loading cases and in which the structure is known to be
undamaged, cf. Sec. 4.3.5 Conclusion of Structural Health MonitoringStructural Health Mis en forme : Police :Italique
Monitoring, p. 44.
Temporal variability of foundation conditions

This point is not relevant for ships.
Inability of wave motion to excite higher modes

This point is less important for ships: As said above, the most important excitations at the mode
frequencies are the propulsion (i.e. main engine and propeller) fluctuating forces and the
34
Brincker R., Andersen P. and Cantieni R., Identification and Level 1 Damage Detection of the Z24 Highway
Bridge by Frequency Domain Decomposition, Exp. Tech., 25, 6, pp. 51-57, 2001.
35
hydrodynamic impacts due to waves. Under normal circumstances whilst underway the former
are always present. The latter are present in heavy sea, so when needed.
Notwithstanding these difficulties, output-only methods begin to be applied to ships modal

parameter identification, both at model basin scale, cf. 35 and for real ships, cf. 36. The abstract of
this latter publication is quoted below.
A precise prediction of the dynamic behaviour of ship structures is important to
avoid resonances and high vibration levels under operation conditions. For
model correlation purposes and forced vibration calculations experimentally
determined natural frequencies, corresponding mode shapes and damping values
are necessary. To identify modal parameters using classical modal analysis, much
effort is required to achieve an adequate excitation of these big structures. Good
results were obtained using a big excitation mass (600 kg) in combination with
sensitive seismic accelerometers. For several reasons this classical modal
approach with its artificial excitation is restricted to the use at a ship yard only.
To obtain modal parameters of ship structures under real draft, ballast, loading
and surrounding water conditions, a suitable testing technique is needed. To
evaluate the suitability of operational modal approach both, classical and
operational modal analysis were applied under ship yard conditions as well as
operational modal analysis during several test trails. Under ship yard conditions
both testing techniques have shown adequate results. For the identification of the
lowest elastic modes of the ship structure operational modal analysis37 is the
preferable tool. Applying operational modal analysis under test trail conditions,
harmonic vibrations, induced mainly by main engine and propeller blade
excitation, pollute the recorded Power Spectral Densities and reduce the
frequency ranges for modal parameter estimation.
The pollution of the results by main engine and propeller excitation comes from the hypothesis
used in the methods based from Eq. (1): the noise wk is supposed to be a white spectrum signal.
The main engine and propeller excitation forces are quasi-periodic, so they do not satisfy this
condition. The output-only methods still need some theoretical improvement to be applicable to
ships. Nevertheless they seem promising.
4.3.2 DETECTION OF SLAMMING
A problem to be solved in HSMSs is detection of slamming, i.e. detection of impacts38.

Estimation of the impacts or forces applied to a structure is also an active field inside SHM: the
(inverse) problem of determining the input of the system from its output requires knowing a
35
Coppotelli G., Dessi D., Mariani R. and Rimondi M., Output-Only Analysis for Modal Parameters Estimation of
an Elastically Scaled Ship, J. Ship Research, 52, 1, pp. 4556, March 2008.
36
Rosenow S.-E. and Schlottmann G., Parameter identification of ship structures using classical and operational
modal analysis, ISMA 2006 (Int. Conf. on Noise and Vibration Eng.), Leuven, Belgium. 18-20 September 2006.
37
Operational modal analysis (OMA) is another name of output-only modal analysis. Yet other names are ambient
excitation modal analysis and natural excitation modal analysis.
38
An impact is an exchange of momentum between two mechanical systems. Its physical dimension is force time
(= mass velocity). A slam is an impact. The exchange of momentum is between the sea water and the ship
structure.
36
model of the system. A review of impact estimation is given in 39. An impact estimation method
using vibration propagation between sensors is proposed in 40. An impact detection method using
wavelet analysis is proposed in 41. The principle is detection of the peak amplitudes of patterns
(the wavelets) produced by the impacts on the hull. A force estimation method for output-only
problems is proposed in 42.
The problem to be solved for HSMSs is somewhat simpler than the ones treated in these
publications: the question for HSMSs is only to detect that an impact has occurred. Its intensity
does not need to be determined accurately and the determination of its direction or location is not
required.
These techniques rely on the knowledge of the modal frequencies and damping coefficients. The
PP identification method cannot then be used.
The implementation of such techniques in HSMSs would make installation of a bow seawater
pressure transducer redundant.
4.3.3 MODAL ANALYSIS OF THE LIVERPOOL BAY
SHM is based on modal analysis. In this section, the results of the theoretical modal analysis of
the Liverpool Bay performed with the uclmars12 code are presented. These results are then
only for the symmetric deformations.
The first seven deformation modes are shown in Figure 3 below. The numbering of these modes
begins at two (the numbering convention used is that modes zero and one are the rigid modes:
respectively heave and pitch). In all figures, the mode shapes are normalized in such a way that
the terms rr in 21 equal one43. x/L = 0 is the stern and x/L = 1 the bow. The vertical dotted lines
represent the locations of the main bulkheads.
39
Inoue H., Harrigan J. J. and Reid S. R., Review of inverse analysis for indirect measurement of impact force,
Appl. Mech. Rev., 54, 6, pp. 503-524, November 2001.
40
Martin M. T. and Doyle J. F., Impact force identification from wave propagation responses, Int. J. Impact Eng.,
18, 1, pp. 65-77, January 1996.
41
Du S. X., Hudson D. A., Price W. G., Temarel P., Chen R. Z. and Wu Y. S, Wavelet analysis of extreme wave
load experiments with a flexible ship model, Proc. PRADS 2004 (9th Int. Symp. Practical Design of Ships and
Other Floating Structures), 1, pp. 301-308, 2004.
42
Parloo E., Verboven P., Guillaume P. and Van Overmeire M., Force identification by means of in-operation
modal models, J. Sound Vibr., 262, pp. 161173, 2003.
43
The mode shapes become orthonormal instead of being just orthogonal.
37
4
Bulkheads
Mode 2
3 Mode 3
Mode 4
Mode 5
Normed Displacement [ad]
2 Mode 6
Mode 7
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-1
-2
-3
-4
x/L [ad]
Figure 3: Vertical displacement of the first seven deformation modes
In Figure 4 to Figure 9 below, each of these modes is shown in the undamaged and damaged
cases. The damage considered is the same as in Sec. 4.2.2 Computation of the deformations in Mis en forme : Police :Italique
case of structural damageComputation of the deformations in case of structural damage, p. 28.
The red squares represent the location of the damage.
3
1 2 3 4
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-1
Bulkheads
Damage location
-2
Undamaged
Damage 1
-3 Damage 2
Damage 3
Damage 4
-4
x/L [ad]
Figure 4: Vertical displacement of mode 2 in the undamaged and damaged cases
38
3
1 2 3 4
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-1
Bulkheads
Damage location
-2
Undamaged
Damage 1
-3 Damage 2
Damage 3
Damage 4
-4
x/L [ad]
3
1 2 3 4
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-1
Bulkheads
Damage location
-2
Undamaged
Damage 1
-3 Damage 2
Damage 3
Damage 4
-4
x/L [ad]
39
3
1 2 3 4
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-1
Bulkheads
Damage location
-2
Undamaged
Damage 1
-3 Damage 2
Damage 3
Damage 4
-4
x/L [ad]
3
1 2 3 4
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-1
Bulkheads
Damage location
-2
Undamaged
Damage 1
-3 Damage 2
Damage 3
Damage 4
-4
x/L [ad]
40
3
1 2 3 4
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-1
Bulkheads
Damage location
-2
Undamaged
Damage 1
-3 Damage 2
Damage 3
Damage 4
-4
x/L [ad]
From Figure 4 to Figure 9, we can see that, for this level of damage for which the structure is not
failed, the variations of the mode shapes are small.
The dry modal frequencies for all these cases are shown in Table 5 below.
Undamaged Damage 1 Damage 2 Damage 3 Damage 4

Mode no. Frequency Variation Variation Variation Variation
[Hz] [%] [%] [%] [%]
2 0.87 -0.07 -1.94 -1.77 -0.04
3 2.00 -0.35 -1.14 -1.65 -0.20
4 3.36 -0.86 -0.06 -0.01 -0.48
5 4.85 -1.28 -1.08 -0.85 -0.82
6 6.37 -1.47 -0.25 -0.71 -1.04
7 7.87 -1.24 -0.25 0.00 -1.17
Table 5: Dry modal frequencies in the undamaged and damaged cases
From this table, we can see that the Rayleigh theorem is verified: in the damaged cases the
modal frequencies either decrease or do not change. There is no change when damage is located
where the radius of curvature of the ships girder for the mode considered is null. The variations
are nevertheless small. The order of magnitude of the uncertainty interval of the frequency
identification with present day output-only methods is 0.7 %, cf. Sec. 4.3.1 Damage- Mis en forme : Police :Italique
occurrence detectionDamage-occurrence detection, p. 32. In each damage case, the modal
frequency variation of at least three modes out of the seven is above this value. Nonetheless,
41
modal analysis procedures like the SSI method described in Sec. 4.3.1 cannot readily be applied
to ships structure damage detection for several reasons:
These procedures require some human intervention. Even if their automation is an active
field of research, cf. for instance 44, this goal is at the moment not achievable.
As said above p. 24, the main engine and propeller excitation forces are quasi-periodic and so
do not satisfy the white spectrum hypothesis: the output-only methods still need some
theoretical improvement to be applicable to ships.
All current modal analysis methods are aimed at identifying a discrete mode model. A ship is
surrounded by a fluid of infinite extent, which is a continuous mode mechanical system. To
be applicable to ships, a modal analysis procedure should have to take this fact into account.
Damage detection for ship can be foreseen but requires improvements of the modal analysis
procedures.
The contribution of a force to a modes amplitude is proportional to the integral of this force
along the ships length multiplied by the mode shape shown on Figure 3 divided by the modal
frequency squared. The contribution of an impact to a modes amplitude is proportional to the
integral of this impact along the ships length multiplied by the mode shape shown on Figure 3
but divided only by the modal frequency45. Impacts contribute more to the higher modal
frequency modes than forces; these two cases have to be treated differently.
To estimate the maximum frequency of interest in case of forces, we will consider seven modes.
The highest dry frequency is 7.87 Hz. The uclmars12 package does not show the wet
frequencies, but they are usually around 60 % of the dry ones. This would give 4.7 Hz for the
highest wet frequency. The maximum frequency of interest for this mode would be say three to
four times the resonant frequency, so around 16 Hz.
DNV specifies that sensors measuring slamming should have the required accuracy up to
100 Hz, cf. Sec. 3.4.4.4 DNVs Sensors SpecificationsSensors Specifications, p. 13. This gives Mis en forme : Police :Italique
an order of magnitude of the maximum frequency of interest in the impact case.
The number of modes to be taken into account in both force and impact cases would anyway
require further experimental studies.
4.3.4 STRUCTURAL DEFORMATION MEASUREMENTS
The determination of the minimum set of sensors to permit the damage-detection capability at a
useful level will be possible only when efficient output-only modal analysis methods are
available. The aim of the present section is only to indicate directions in which the set of sensors
may evolve with present day technology.
Ideally, what is required is measurement of the global deformation of the structure. This can be
assessed by the relative positions of the bow, stern and main transversal bulkheads represented
by their four corners (deck line and bilge). The function of these bulkheads is to collect the
buoyancy, the loading and other forces applied locally to the hull or to internal structures and to
spread them on the hull as global shear forces; the forces in turn create the global bending
moments. Thus these bulkheads act a global level; they are the loading points of the ships
44
Reynders E. and De Roeck G., Reference-based combined deterministicstochastic subspace identification for
experimental and operational modal analysis, Mech. Syst. Signal. Proc., 22, 3, pp. 617637, April 2008.
45
The constants by which these integrals are multiplied do not have the same physical dimensions.
42
girder. Even if they cannot be considered as rigid, they are, with the bow and the stern, the
elements most significantly representing the global shape of the ship structure.
Unfortunately, measurement of these relative positions seems hardly possible with present day
technology: Relative position of the deck line points could be measured with means used in civil
engineering, total stations46 or GNSS in RTK mode, but as reflectors or GNSS antennas would
have to be on the deck, because of spray and green water, these means cannot be used in bad
weather. What remains are strain gauges and accelerometers as for present day HSMSs. We
examine below how these sensors can be used to measure the global deformation of the ships
girder.
Static deformations of the ships girder

The static components of LBSGs measurements give the longitudinal static radii of curvature
(of the ships girder). The static components of horizontal accelerometers measurements47 give,
in theory48, the static rotations around the horizontal axes, i.e. around the longitudinal and
transversal axes. Vertical accelerometers do not give any information about static deformation.
The missing information is then the vertical shear deformations49. Today there are no means
other than the civil engineering ones cited above able to measure them.
Dynamic50 deformations of the ships girder

The dynamic components of accelerometers measurements give their dynamic relative positions.
The global dynamic deformation of the ships girder can then in theory be measured. As the
dynamic components of LBSGs measurements give the dynamic radii of curvature, the
deformation can be decomposed in bending and shear deformations. In theory, all dynamic
deformations can then be measured.
Interestingly, the 3D finite elements structural computations performed in 26 show a longitudinal
mode (Table 1 of this reference) at a frequency which would be around 4.9 Hz in the Liverpool
Bay case. Measuring the longitudinal accelerations would then be useful.
To distinguish between the acceleration due to gravity and the acceleration due to acceleration,
the attitude51 of the accelerometers must be known. This needs the measurement of angle rates;
so, strictly speaking, the motions can only be measured with inertial measurement units (IMUs),
cf. D7 (Draft low cost VDR standards), Sec. 7: Annex: Ship Motion Measurement System, for
a description of them and more generally of AHRSs. As the heading is not required, a full AHRS
is not necessary. If the ship is considered as rigid enough in torsion, the attitude of all
accelerometers can be measured with only one set of rate gyros.
The accelerometers to be fitted would depend on the modes to be measured:
For symmetric52 modes: vertical and horizontal longitudinal accelerometers in the
centreplane of the ship,
46
A combination of a theodolite and a distance measurement.
47
These accelerometers are then used as inclinometers.
48
These measurements must be accurate enough to be useful.
49
The static rotation around the vertical axis and the horizontal shear deformation are not measured either, but as no
horizontal static loading is supposed to be applied, these deformations are not significant.
50
Dynamic means here non-zero frequency.
51
The rotational position relative to a given frame of reference, usually the earth frame of reference.
52
i.e. bending around the transversal axis, vertical shear deformation and longitudinal deformation.
43
For symmetric modes plus torsion around the longitudinal axis: vertical accelerometers on
each sides of the ship, horizontal longitudinal accelerometers in the centreplane of the ship,
For symmetric plus anti-symmetric53 modes: three axis accelerometers on each side of the
ship.
The first necessity for measurement of a mode is that the sensors considered be driven by this
mode. This requires that
1. the sensor is sensitive to the motion produced by the mode,
2. the sensor is not located on a modal node.
The mode shapes shown in Figure 3 indicate that the two ends of the ship are driven by all the
modes. For a greatest precision of identification of the highest frequencies, the accelerometers
located there should be placed at the extreme bow and stern, not on the collision bulkhead or on
the last bulkhead at the stern. In theory, a single measurement point at the bow or at the stern
contains information about all the modal frequencies and damping coefficients. Measurement at
both would nevertheless be better; the more independent measurements, the more accurate the
estimation of these parameters. The top of the castle can also be considered as an open-end of the
structure. Accelerometers can also be fitted there. The measurement of the mode shapes could be
obtained by putting additional accelerometers on each main transversal bulkhead.
In conclusion, by using only present day technology, the complete global dynamic behaviour of
the ships structure can be measured. All these accelerometers are intended to measure
vibrations; they can be different from accelerometers for motion measurement.
4.3.5 CONCLUSION
The analysis of the preceding sections shows that recording of the raw data would be valuable
even with the present minimal HSMS: we cannot rule out the appearance in the future of fully
usable output-only modal analysis methods. With such methods, the post-processing of this data
could determine the instant of occurrence of damage and would then be a help in reconstructing
the scenario of the whole accident. As the damage indicator is the variation of the modal
frequencies, the raw data has to be recorded over the whole ships life in order to have reference
cases where the ship structure is undamaged and in the same loading and fouling conditions 54.
For the ships owner, such a recording would allow analysis of the modal parameters of the ship
structure to detect minor damage at an early stage. The resulting economic gain in the repair
works could justify a more complete set of sensors than the minimal one. Over the longer term,
this recording would facilitate quantification of the global condition of the ship structure and
thereby an assessment of the ships remaining service life and benefit, cf. for instance 55 for the
comparison of the Remaining Life Benefit between various maintenance and repair policies. This
task could be a part of the Automated Data Analysis of the VDR data ashore with more
sophisticated tools than aboard.
Specifying the minimal set of sensors to allow a sufficient identification of the modal parameters
of the whole structure is beyond the scope of the VDR standards. It is a matter of HSMS
specifications. As the regulating body for these systems are the CSs, this duty resides with them.
53
i.e. torsion around the longitudinal axis, bending around the vertical axis and horizontal shear deformations.
54
In the vocabulary of SHM, these reference cases are called baseline cases.
55
Iwata R., Kawamura Y., Asa T. and Murai M., A Study on a Method for Maintenance of Floating Platform
considering Remaining Life Benefit, Proc. TEAM 2008, Istanbul, Turkey, 6-9 October 2008 (to appear).
44
As the modal parameters vary with the ships loading and state, the right place to record the raw
data is the VDR, where the other parameters of the ship, the ELBs. This could also avoid fitting a
backup in a HSMS.
5 Evolution of HSMSs and VDRs
5.1 EVOLUTION OF HSMSS
5.1.1 FILTERING THE SENSOR DATA
From what is said in the Sec. 4.3 Structural Health MonitoringStructural Health Monitoring, Mis en forme : Police :Italique
p. 30, some damage-detection capability can be gained from the VDR record if the raw data of
the HSMS sensors are recorded. Even if all HSMS manufacturers do not propose providing raw
data to other equipment at the moment, this is always possible. The difficulty of this recording is
on the VDR side: due to the limited storage capacity of the VDR, recording this data in it is less
straightforward than it can seem.
The goal of the recording of the sensors signals is to perform a posteriori modal analysis.
Between two slamming or sloshing events, suitable filtering can limit the amount of data to be
stored to that which contains useful information. The maximum frequency of interest of this
analysis being say 16 Hz, cf. Sec. 4.3.3 Modal analysis of the Liverpool BayModal analysis of Mis en forme : Police :Italique
the Liverpool Bay, p. 42, a sampling rate of 50 Hz should be adequate. The amount of
information to be recorded for the minimal HSMS is then: 6 sensors56 x 16 bits x 50 Hz =
50 Mb/day. This amount can be reduced by various compression techniques.
DNV specifies that sensors dedicated to slamming measurement must have a sampling rate of
500 Hz, cf. Sec. 3.4.4.6 DNVs Record Sampling RateRecord Sampling Rate, p. 13. As said in Mis en forme : Police :Italique
Sec. 4.3.3 Modal analysis of the Liverpool BayModal analysis of the Liverpool Bay, p. 42, Mis en forme : Police :Italique
slamming (and sloshing) excites all the global modes. The global structure sensors should then
be recorded at this rate. The good news is that this record is useful only when the whipping (the
vibration resulting from slamming) is significant. The rest of the time, recording at 50 Hz is
sufficient. On large ships, whipping can last for as long as one min, cf. 20 Figure 14. If the
slamming detection function is ensured by using only these sensors, cf. Sec. 4.3.2 Detection of Mis en forme : Police :Italique
slammingDetection of slamming, p. 36, the sea water pressure transducer is redundant.
The sensors for sloshing monitoring are dedicated sensors (pressure transducers, local stain
gages, accelerometers). They are a complement to the HSMS. The recording of theses sensors in
the VDR would follow the same principle as the recording during a whipping: this recording is
useful only when the resulting vibration is significant. DNV specifies for this recording a
sampling rate of 3 kHz, cf. Sec. 3.4.4.6 DNVs Record Sampling RateRecord Sampling Rate, Mis en forme : Police :Italique
p. 13. The rest of the time, the 50 Hz sampling rate is sufficient.
In the following, the continuous signals sampled at 50 Hz together with the periods sampled at
higher rates are called the filtered data.
56
The five sensors of the minimal set, plus an accelerometer at the stern.
45
5.1.2 SENDING MODAL PARAMETERS
If the filtered data cannot be recorded in the VDR for the voyage duration, the modal parameters
computed by the HSMS could be sent to the VDR as a summary of this data.
5.1.3 MEASURING THE TEMPERATURE
Temperature is not usually measured in present day HSMSs. To allow temperature correction of
the modal frequencies, the temperature of the structure should be measured.
5.1.4 PREPARING SCREEN DATA
The D6 report on proposed changes for VDRs emphasises the importance of the perception that
crew has of the situation. The screens displayed by the HSMS should therefore be recorded. If
different screens can be displayed at the same time in different locations, for instance on the
bridge and in the cargo control room, all these screens should be recorded.
The information content of HSMS screens is low. Recording them as images would be a waste of
resources. A more economical way would be to record only
the display on which the screen is displayed,
the status of the display (on, off, failure)
the type (related to the HSMS codes version) of the screen displayed,
the value of the variable information shown (related to this screen type),
for each screen update which from the survey is a minimum interval of 1 second.
This data has to be provided by the HSMS.
5.1.5 PROVIDING PLAYBACK CODES FOR OF THE RECORDED DATA
A result reported in D3 (Report on Survey Result - VDR) is the lack of playback facility for the
data recorded in VDRs. For data in proprietary format the playback must be supported by HSMS
manufacturer through information or a tool that may be stored in the VDR. This point is now
covered by IEC 61996-1:2007.
5.2 EVOLUTION OF VDRS
5.2.1 RECORDING THE FILTERED DATA
The VDR should record as much as possible of the filtered data. A recording over the voyage
duration would allow ashore analysis of the structure condition. If the filtered data cannot be
stored continuously over this duration, an alternative could be to keep
the continuous record of the last say 5 days, the duration of a storm,
beyond 5 days say 10 min continuous record every two hours for the duration of the voyage ,
all the slamming and sloshing records for the duration of the voyage
46
The HSMS sends the filtered data continuously and slamming and sloshing data on event
detection. The implementation of the storage regime is a function of the VDR.
5.2.2 RECORDING THE MODAL PARAMETERS
The modal parameters provided at the same interval as the statistical data (5 min) can be
recorded at least over the voyage duration.
5.2.3 RECORDING THE TEMPERATURE
The temperature of the structure should be recorded at least over the voyage duration.
5.2.4 RECORDING THE SCREENS
The screen data should be recorded at least over the voyage duration.
5.3 PHYSICAL / LOGICAL INTERFACE BETWEEN HSMS AND VDR

Given that future ships will have many more network communication structures, and the
bandwidth required for the filtered data record, the preferred communications would be by IEC
61162-400 standard. The IEC 61162-3 standard is for real time data and is not intended for large
packets of data and the IEC 61162-1 and 2 standards do not have enough bandwidth.
With this standard, the filtered data can be sent at intervals as time stamped data files. Messages
for the HSMS processed data (status of the HSMS, statistical data, modal parameters,
temperature, screen data) would have to be defined as part of the IEC 61162-400 standard.
Remark: In the future, HSMS will be integrated in the IBS, particularly if a route planning
function is implemented in the latter. Interface with this system should be taken into account
now in the HSMS standards.
6 Conclusion
Today, the main functions of VDRs and of HSMSs are entirely separate. A HSMS intervenes
before accidents and its goal is to avoid it. It deals with a sound structure. A VDR intervenes
after an accident and its goal is to analyse it. It deals with a damaged structure. Their only
common function is that they are both used for a posteriori operational analysis. A way to gain
some overlap between the separate functions is;
1. to include a damage-detection capability in HSMSs,
2. to record (filtered) measurements of the HSMS sensors in the VDR.
The first item requires an improvement upon present day output-only modal analysis in order to
obtain good estimates of modal parameters. Ideally this damage-detection function would use
sensors driven by all significant modes. Such a function would anyway be valuable with the
present minimal set of sensors, but with damage detection restricted to those that affect the
modes driving these sensors. Introducing this damage-detection capability in HSMS is a
necessity: present day HSMSs does not indicate the presence of damage, which may give a false
47
sense of safety to the shipmaster. A greater set of sensors can be justified by the necessity to
avoid this danger.
The second item would facilitate a damage-detection capability in accident analysis. Knowing
the instant of occurrence of damage would be very valuable information. From an operational
point of view, i.e. for the ships owner, such a recording would, through more sophisticated tools
than aboard, allow detection onshore of minor damage at an early stage. As the VDR records the
other parameters of the ship and the ELBs, it is the right place to store the HSMS data.
Determining the minimum set of sensors allowing this damage-detection capability at a useful
level is beyond the scope of VDR standards. As the regulating bodies for HSMS are de facto the
Classification Societies, this duty falls to them. This determination will be possible only when
efficient output-only modal analysis methods become available.
This capability will, for the moment, be limited to detecting the occurrence of damage.
Localizing and determining the type and the extent of the damages is at the moment at the
research stage. This function will require a denser set of sensors and/or other sensors. As fitting
of HSMS onboard a ship is at the sole discretion of the owner, it is hoped that this improvement
will be driven by the economic benefits resulting from the ability to detect and characterise
damage at an early stage.
_______________________
48

D20-D21-D22 - Hull Structure Monitoring System and VDR - 07-12-09 V6

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

D20-D21-D22 - Hull Structure Monitoring System and VDR - 07-12-09 V6

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

D20-D21-D22 Hull Structure Monitoring System and VDR

Sixth Framework Programme

D20-D21-D22 Hull Structure Monitoring System

DUE DATE OF DELIVERABLE: 31ST AUGUST 2008

Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable: University of

Electronic Written By Checked by (WPL) Approved by

EMDM D20-D21-D22 J.-M. Forestier M. Taylor

5.2 Evolution of VDRs....................................................................................... 46

Table 1: Manufacturers of HSMSs (January 2009) ..................................................... 20

2.1 ACRONYMS USED

2.2 VOCABULARY CONVENTIONS

3 Present day HSMSs

3.1 GOALS OF HSMSS

3.2 HSMSS CARRIAGE REQUIREMENTS

3.3 HSMSS CERTIFICATION

3.4 HSMSS CLASSIFICATION SOCIETIES RULES

3.4.1 THE MINIMAL HSMS

3.4.1.1 MINIMAL SET OF SENSORS

Af t Strain Gauge Midships Strain Fwd Strain Accelerometer

Ships with large deck openings like container ships:

Other sensors can be added to this minimal set:

3.4.1.2 INTERNAL DATA STORAGE AND DATA BACKUP

3.4.2 AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING

(ABS) Guide for Hull Condition Monitoring 2003

3.4.2.3 CLASS NOTATIONS

HM3: Voyage Data Recording7

3.4.2.4 SENSORS SPECIFICATIONS

3.4.2.5 SENSORS SETTING AND CALIBRATION

o Set-up of the sensors in a known loading condition

3.4.2.6 RECORD SAMPLING RATE

o Hint: Three times the maximal frequency of the frequency range

3.4.2.7 RECORD RESOLUTION

3.4.2.8 REQUESTED RESULTS

o For all symbols and all sensors

o HM1: Motion Monitoring

o HM2: Stress Monitoring

o HM3: Voyage Data Recording

3.4.2.9 INTERNAL DATA STORAGE

3.4.2.10 DATA BACKUP

o Cf. the +R notation

3.4.2.12 INTERFACE WITH A VDR

o No interface with a VDR specified

3.4.3 BUREAU VERITAS

3.4.3.3 CLASS NOTATIONS

The BV class notation is MON-HULL. There is no provision for extensions.

3.4.3.4 SENSORS SPECIFICATIONS

Resolution8: < 7 % of the full displayed range

3.4.3.5 SENSORS SETTING AND CALIBRATION

o Set-up of the sensors in a known loading condition

3.4.3.6 RECORD SAMPLING RATE

3.4.3.7 RECORD RESOLUTION

3.4.3.8 REQUESTED RESULTS

o Still water bending moment warnings

o Wave bending moment warnings based on statistical analysis

3.4.3.9 INTERNAL DATA STORAGE

o The data storage can be in the HSMS or in the IBS, if any

3.4.3.10 DATA BACKUP

o No data backup specified

3.4.3.12 INTERFACE WITH A VDR

o No interface with a VDR specified

3.4.4 DET NORSK VERITAS

3.4.4.3 CLASS NOTATIONS

E Sensor monitoring the propulsion shaft(s) output/rpm